TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP IN THE ......Transformational leadership according to Lesli & Lioyd is a...

Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal Volume 27, Special Issue 5, 2021

1 Business Analytics for Sustainability 1528-2686-27-S2-26

TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP IN THE

PERSONALITY, PERFORMANCE AND COMMITMENTS

OF KADESI THEOLOGICAL HIGH SCHOOL

ORGANIZATIONS

Muner Daliman, Sekolah Tinggi Teologi Kadesi Yogyakarta

Hanna Suparti, Sekolah Tinggi Teologi Kadesi Yogyakarta

David Ming, Sekolah Tinggi Teologi Kadesi Yogyakarta

ABSTRACT

Based on the abstract that personality has a positive direct effect on organizational

commitment, meaning that strengthening personality will have an effect on increasing

organizational commitment. This implies that improving the organizational commitment of

lecturers requires improvements in personality. The efforts that need to be improved in relation to

the personality of the lecturer are: Prioritizing lecturer services as professional staff, improving the

quality of the lecturers themselves in relation to abilities and careers, improving scientific

development, increasing personality competence. Meanwhile, the next suggestion is that

performance has a positive direct effect on organizational commitment. So this will have the

implication that to improve the commitment of lecturers to the organization it is necessary to

improve the performance of good lecturers. As for the efforts that can be made to improve lecturer

performance, there are efforts made to improve lecturer performance: Fair treatment in job

services, improvement and increase in wages, attention to the welfare of lecturers, Personality is

the characteristics and characteristics that represent the attitude or character of the lecturer,

including patterns of thought and feeling, self-concept, temperament, and mentality which are

generally in line with general habits in the future. This means that strengthening the personality of

the lecturers will have an effect on improving lecturer performance. Efforts that can be made with

the personality of the lecturer are: Always improve their competence because a strong personality

of the lecturer will improve the performance of good lecturers, Increase lecturers' wages and

salaries, Improve training and facilities, Improve education and promotion, Join certification

programs for those who have not, Expanding knowledge and skills, Providing awards and

punishments, Removing diverse lecturer status.

Keywords: Transformational Leadership, Organizational Commitment, Personality and

Performance

INTRODUCTION

The concept of transformational leadership was originally introduced by James MacGregor

Burns in 1979, in his book entitled Leadership, Burns uses the term transforming leadership, which

is transformed is leadership to followers, namely changing the leadership process between leaders

and subordinates helping each other to advance to a higher level based on passion and motivation1.



Furthermore it is said that transformational leadership can be seen when leaders and

followers make each other to advance to a higher level of morale and motivation. Through the

power of vision and personality, transformational leaders are able to inspire subordinates to change

expectations, perceptions and motivations towards a common goal2.

Transformational leadership according to Lesli & Lioyd is a leadership style that can create

mutually motivating conditions between leaders and followers, so that leaders can change followers

for the better and create a sense of trust from followers to leaders. The factors that influence

transformational leadership according to Lesli are: 1). Charisma, 2). Inspiration from Leaders, 3).

Motivation from the leader, and 4). Intellectual Stimulation3.

According to Bernard, who has extended the original idea, developed this theory of

transformational leadership with an understanding based on the impact of his subordinates instilling

in the trust, respect and admiration of his subordinates. According to Bass himself, there are four

components of transformational leadership, namely: 1) Intellectual-transformational stimulation

challenges the status quo, and encourages subordinate creativity, 2) Individual consideration

involves, offers support and encouragement to subordinates is free to share ideas and the leader

gives direct recognition. From subordinates as a unique contribution. 3) Inspirational motivation

has a vision that is able to articulate to subordinates, and 4) The ideal influence serves as a role

model for subordinates, to have more trust and respect and imitate the leader who is internalized in

ideals, so that transformational leadership can increase motivation, enthusiasm and performance

subordinates through various mechanisms, so as to align subordinates with tasks to improve their

performance kinerja4.

Bass & Riggio see that transformational leadership is more about intrinsic motivation and

positive development from subordinates. Both also view that transformational leadership represents

a more interesting view of leadership than transactional leadership which emphasizes the process of

exchanging social roles. According to Bass & Riggio transformational leadership is more likely to

be applied in today's increasingly complex organizations where followers not only want leaders

who can inspire in helping followers through their environment but also leaders want followers to

have loyalty or not and whether followers show good performance or not5.

Stephen & Timothy state that transformational leadership is a leader who inspires followers

to go beyond eliminating self-interest and who is able to exert a tremendous influence on followers.

The factors are 1). Ideal influence, 2). Inspirational motivation, 3). Intellectual stimulation, 4).

Individual considerations6. Transformational leadership according to Darwis & Gani et al., is

leadership where there is a process of raising each other to a higher level of morality and motivation

based on trust, respect, and pride in the importance of togetherness in achieving common goals. The

influencing factors are: 1) Having a vision, 2) Inspiring, 3) Encouraging, 4) Coaching and 5) Team

building 7.

Jerald Greenberg and Robert A. Baron stated that, transformational leadership is leadership

that uses charisma to change and revitalize the organization. The factors that influence

transformational leadership according to Jerald are: 1). Charisma, 2). Have a strong vision and

mission of the organization, 3). Intellectual stimulation, 4). Individual attention, 5). Inspirational

motivation8. Furthermore, Kreitner & Kinicki assert that transformational leadership changes

subordinates by creating changes in goals, values, beliefs and aspirations9.



1. Transformational leadership is a leadership pattern through three elements, namely charisma,

individual considerations, and intellectual simulation in the Head of the Theological College.

2. Charisma is described as the most important component in the concept of transformational leadership.

There is little that can be used to describe a charismatic leader, which contains feelings of love from

subordinates, even subordinates feel confident and trust each other under a charismatic leader,

subordinates accept their leader as a model they want to emulate, every time the enthusiasm for the

work of subordinates grows., able to make subordinates work harder and longer happily. The

transformational leadership charisma scale describes the degree to which the leader creates

enthusiasm for followers, being able to discern what really matters. Generating a sense of mission

towards the organization, through charisma the leader inspires loyalty and perseverance instills pride

and loyalty and inspires respect.

3. Individual consideration means that under transformational leadership, the generalization of

differences between individuals does not have its place. A transformational leader will pay attention

to individual factors as not to be generalized, because there are differences in interests and self-

development that differ from one another.

4. Intellectual stimulation means that in transformational leadership a leader will carry out intellectual

stimulation. This element of leadership can be seen, among others, in the ability of a leader to create,

interpret and elaborate symbols that appear in life, teach subordinates to think in new ways. In short,

subordinates are conditioned in situations to always ask themselves and compare them with the

assumptions that develop in society, which in turn develops problem-solving abilities freely10

Based on various studies, it can be seen that Olga Epitropica, suggests 6 things, why

transformational leadership is important, for an organization:

1. Significantly improve organizational performance

2. Positively associated with long-term marketing orientation and customer satisfaction

3. Generating a high commitment of its members to the organization.

4. Increase employee confidence in the organization's daily management and behavior

5. Increase job satisfaction through work and leadership

6. Reduce the stress of workers and improve welfare.

Gary presents some of the results of research on transformational leadership. Gary argues

that transformational leadership is leadership that can create an atmosphere so that followers feel

trust, admiration, loyalty and respect for the leader, and they must be motivated to do more than

expect. Good leaders change and motivate followers by: 1) Making followers realize the

importance of the task, 2) Persuading followers to put the interests of the team or organization

above personal interests, 3) Activating the higher needs of followers. The factors that influence it

are as follows: 1) Ideal influence, 2) Individual considerations, 3) Inspirational motivation, d)

Intellectual simulation11

.

Some guidelines for implementing transformational leadership are as follows 12

:

1. Develop a clear and compelling vision

2. Develop a mission to achieve the vision

3. Articulation and promotion of the vision

4. Act with confidence and optimism

5. Express trust in followers

6. Use dramatic and symbolic actions to discover key values

7. Celebrate success

8. Leading by example

9. Creating, modifying or deleting cultural forms



10. Use transitional sayings to help people through change are: 1) charisma, 2) inspiration, 3) intellectual

stimulation, 4) individual consideration 13

.

Sukarso, et al., stated that transformational leadership is leadership that provides

individualized consideration and intellectual stimulation to subordinates or followers.

Characteristics of transformational leadership. Leaders/Chairmen are the highest expectations for

staff and students. The chairman is a person who knows a lot about the duties of his subordinates

and subordinates who determine the rhythm for the school 14

.

Educational institutions are a form of moral organization, which is certainly different from

other forms of organization, especially profit-oriented as an organizational institution; its success is

not only determined by the Chair but also by the lecturers and the process of the institution itself.

Based on the theories above, it can be synthesized that transformational leadership is the

behavior of an individual or a leader who seeks to change, direct, and develop the values that exist

in his organization in order to create good relationships between lecturers in order to realize shared

goals in the future., with the following indicators: a 1) Charismatic, 2) Individualized consideration

3) Ideal influence 4) motivating inspiration, 5) Intellectual stimulation

RESEARCH METHODS

This research is a research that uses quantitative methods. In practice: This study uses the

Quantitative Research Stage through descriptive analysis, linkert scale and path analysis using the

survey method. There are three variables in this study, namely the exogenous variables of

Personality (X1) and performance (X2) and endogenous variables of organizational commitment15

.

Tabel 1

RESEARCH SUBJECTS

No. Name Gender Functional Education

Background

1

lecturers at

theological

colleges. A

Women Pastoral

Colleges

Graduation from

theological school

2

lecturers at

theological

colleges B

Women Pastoral

Colleges

Graduation from

theological school

3

lecturers at

theological

colleges C

Male Pastoral

Colleges

Graduation from

theological school

4

lecturers at

theological

colleges D

Women Pastoral

Colleges

Graduation from

theological school

5

lecturers at

theological

colleges E

Male Team Pastoral

Colleges

Graduation from

theological school

6

lecturers at

theological

colleges F

Male Senior Diacon Diploma Ministry



7

lecturers at

theological

colleges. G

Male Senior Pastoral

Colleges Diploma Ministry

8

lecturers at

theological

colleges H

Male Junior Pastoral

Colleges Diploma Ministry

RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

Thus based on the explanation and frame of mind above, the hypothesis proposed is

presumed: There is an influence of Personality, Lecturer Performance on Organizational

Commitment

Based on the description above, research constellations can be made as shown in Figure 1:

FIGURE 1

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT

FIGURE 2

CONSTELATION RESEARCH

Statistic Hypothesis

1. The first hypothesis examines the positive direct influence of Personality on Organizational

Commitment

Ho: β13 ≤ 0,

H1: β13>0

2. The second hypothesis tests the positive direct effect of performance on organizational

commitment.

Ho: β 23≤ 0,

H1: β23>0

3. The third hypothesis tests the positive direct effect of personality on performance.



Ho: β 12 ≤ 0

H1: β 12>0,

RESEARCH RESULTS

Table 2

STATISTICS

Organisation

commitment Personality Performances

N Valid 94 94 94

Missing 0 0 0

Mean 95.69 89.37 90.91

Std. Error of

Mean 2.641 2.606 2.614

Median 94 88 89

Mode 89 86 88

Std.

Deviation 25.605 25.267 25.344

Variance 655.613 638.408 642.337

Range 127 118 121

Minimum 48 32 34

Maximum 175 150 155

Sum 8995 8401 8546

DESCRIPTIF TESTING

Table 3

DESCRIPTIVES

Statistic

Std.

Error

Organisation

Commitment

Mean 95.69 2.641

95%

Confidence

Interval for

Mean

Lower

Bound 90.45

Upper

Bound 100.94

5% Trimmed Mean 94.97

Median 94

Variance 655.613

Std. Deviation 25.605

Minimum 48

Maximum 175

Range 127

Interquartile Range 34

Skewness 0.435 0.249

Kurtosis 0.112 0.493

Personality

Mean 89.37 2.606

95%

Confidence

Lower

Bound 84.2



Interval for

Mean Upper

Bound 94.55


Median 88

Variance 638.408


Minimum 32

Maximum 150

Range 118



Kurtosis -0.319 0.493

Performances

Mean 90.91 2.614

95%

Confidence

Interval for

Mean

Lower

Bound 85.72

Upper

Bound 96.11


Median 89

Variance 642.337


Minimum 34

Maximum 155

Range 121



Kurtosis -0.263 0.493

NORMALITY TEST

Table 4

TESTS OF NORMALITY

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Organization

commitment 0.064 94 .200

* 0.984 94 0.295

Personality 0.049 94 .200* 0.994 94 0.936

Performances 0.058 94 .200* 0.994 94 0.932

*: This is a lower bound of the true significance, a. Lilliefors Significance

Correction

Table 5

CASE PROCESSING SUMMARY



Cases

Included Excluded Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

Organization

Commitment

* Personality

94 100.00% 0 0.00% 94 100.00%

Table 6

ANOVA TABLE

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Organization

Commitment

* Personality

Between

Groups (Combined) 54405.387 43 1265.242 9.634 0

Within Groups 6566.667 50 131.333

Total 60972.053 93

Table 7

CASE PROCESSING SUMMARY

Cases

Included Excluded Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

Organization

Commitment

* Performances

94 100.00% 0 0.00% 94 100.00%

Table 8

ANOVA TABLE

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Organization

Commitment *

Between

Groups (Combined) 56938.187 43 1324.144 16.413 0

Performances Within Groups 4033.867 50 80.677

Total 60972.053 93

REABILITY TESTING

Table 9

RELIABILITY

STATISTICS

Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

0.951 3



Table 10

MODEL SUMMARY

Model R R

Square

Adjusted

R

Square

Std.

Error of

the

Estimate

1 0.790a 0.623 0.619 15.798

a. Predictors: (Constant), KEPRIBDIAN

Table 11

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1

Regression 38009.618 1 38009.618 152.287 .000b

Residual 22962.435 92 249.592

Total 60972.053 93

a. Dependent Variable:Organization Commitment, b. Predictors: (Constant),

Personality

HYPOTHESIS TESTING

Table 12

COEFFICIENTSA

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

B Std.

Error Beta

1 (Constant) 24.183 6.019

4.017 0

Personality 0.8 0.065 0.79 12.34 0

a. Dependent Variable: Organizational Commitment

CORRELATION TESTING

Table 13

CORRELATIONS

Organization

commitment Personality Performance

Organization

commitment

Pearson

Correlation 1 0.790

** 0.921

**

Sig.(2-tailed)

0 0

N 94 94 94

Personality

Pearson

Correlation 0.790

** 1 0.886

**

Sig.(2-tailed) 0

0

N 94 94 94



Performances

Pearson

Correlation 0.921

** 0.886

** 1

Sig.(2-tailed) 0 0

N 94 94 94

**: Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The data descriptions presented in this section include the Organizational Commitment

variable (Y) which is the endogenous variable and the performance variables (X2) and personality

(X1).

a. Commitment data to the organization

Organizational Commitment variable data obtained through quantitative research has a

tendency to result, namely:

Table 14

COMMITMENT DATA

No. Variabel Xmin Xmax Range Mean St.Deviasi Median Modus

1 OrganizationalCommitments 116 174 58 139,1 12,2 137 135

b. Peak Performance Variable Data

The peak performance obtained through quantitative research has a tendency to result

Table 15

PEAK PERFORMANCE VARIABLE DATA

No. Variabel Xmin Xmax Range Mean St.Deviasi Median Modus

1 Peak

performance 108 154 46 135,1 11,5 137,5 140

Based on the results of the statistical description analysis for the three research variables,

namely: the personality of the lecturer (X1), the performance of the lecturer (X2), and the

Commitment to Organization (Y), it can be revealed about the symptoms of data centering as

summarized in the following Statistical Description Summary Table.

Table 16

SUMMARY STATISTICAL DESCRIPTIONS

Criteria X1 X2 Y

Mean 89.37 89.37 90.91

Standard Error 2.606 2.606 2.614



Median 87 88 89

Modus (Mode) 87 86 88

Stand. Deviation 25.271 25.267 25.344

Sample Variance 638.602 638.408 642.337

Range 118 118 121

Minimum 32 32 34

Maximum 150 150 155

Sum 8401 8401 8546

Count 94 94 94

Confidence Level (95.0%) 3.3 2.4 3.3

Maximum Class 8 8 8

Minimum Class 15 15 16

Table 17

DESKRIPTIONDATA VARIABLE RECAPITULATION X1, X2, DAN Y

No. Variable Xmin Xmax Range Mean St.Deviasi Median Modus

1 Organizational

Commitments 116 174 58 139,1 12,2 137 135

2 Peak

Performance 108 154 46 135,1 11,5 137,5 140

3 Personality 103 160 57 127,8 15,9 124,5 160

Prior to the path analysis, the data must meet several statistical test requirements, namely (1)

Error Normality Test, and (2) Test of Significance and Linearity of Regression Coefficient.

Table 18

TEST NORMALITAS GALAT CONCLUSION

NO. Range

Galat N Lhitung

Ltabel

α= 0.05 Decision

1 Y atas X1 94 0.0898 0.0914 Normal

2 Y atas X2 94 0.0839 0.914 Normal

3 X2 atas X1 94 0.0839 0.0914 Normal

In accordance with the description above, the normality requirements for the estimated error

have been met.



Table 19

SUMMARY OF REGRESSION MODEL LINEARITY TEST

RESULTS

No

Hub

Model.

Between

Variables

F=hitung(tuna

cocok)

F=table(

α= 0,05)

F=table(

α= 0,01)

Pola Test

Linieritas

1 Y atas X1 1,613 8,557 26,254 Linier

2 Y atas X2 2,628 8,557 26,254 Linier

3 X2 atas X1 2,832 8,557 26,254 Linier

From the table above, it can be concluded that there is a positive direct influence of

personality on organizational commitment, a positive direct effect of performance on organizational

commitment, and a positive direct influence of personality on performance.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of hypothesis testing that has been done, it can be concluded that the

personality of the lecturer has a positive and significant direct effect on organizational commitment.

These findings provide evidence that empirically the increase in personality by a lecturer has an

impact on increasing organizational commitment. The quantitative data obtained quantitatively in

the study is strengthened by the data from observations in qualitative research which gives the

direction that personality is closely related to lecturer commitment. Lecturer commitment is

determined by the personality factor possessed by the lecturer himself.

Personality has a very strong role in a lecturer in carrying out his duties. Personality traits

can help a person in the selection process as a lecturer, adjust the field of work, and help someone

in his career development. Patterns of thought and feeling as well as mentality will influence a

lecturer in adjusting to his environment. This is in accordance with the theory put forward by

Greenberg & Robert (2008) which states that personality is a unique and relatively stable pattern of

behavior, thoughts, and emotions, shown by individuals, so the lecturer will be able to carry out

their duties properly and shows his role as a lecturer who is full of loyalty.

Performance has a Positive Direct Effect on Commitment to the Organization

The results of hypothesis testing and the results of the above analysis can be concluded that

lecturer performance has a positive and significant direct effect on Commitment to the

Organization. This finding illustrates empirically that the strong performance possessed by lecturers

will strengthen the commitment of lecturers to their institutions. This obedience will shape the

character of the lecturers who are always part of the institution where they work. The quantitative

data above is reinforced by data from observations of qualitative research which have conclusions

about performance, which is an expression of employee attitudes towards work that reflects a

pleasant or unpleasant experience based on the compatibility between expectations and reality

obtained from their work.



Performance has a very strong role in a lecturer, if someone does a job with the orientation

or purpose of meeting the needs of life and welfare, then when an institution is able to provide a

high salary, so that the level of welfare of the lecturer is very good, then the lecturer should enjoy

performance.

Colquitt et al., (2009) argues that performance is the value of a set of employee behaviors

that contribute positively or negatively to achieving organizational goals. Basically, performance

has three dimensions, namely (a) task behavior, (b) moral behavior, and (c) challenging behavior.

Direct Positive Effect of Lecturer Personality on Lecturer Peak Performance

Based on the results of hypothesis testing and research findings, it shows that the personality

of the lecturer has a positive and significant direct effect on the performance of the lecturer. Thus, it

is expected that lecturers are loyal and provide themselves to work with high enthusiasm in their

work community and have a high sense of trust in the institution where they work. This shows that

personality cannot be ignored in a person. The personality of the lecturer will determine how a

person can work well. This means that in an institution if someone can feel satisfied at work, a

strong self-confidence is needed, so that they can carry out their duties with full responsibility.

Related to this research, the effect of personality on performance is reinforced by the theory

put forward by Robbins and Judge, which states that proactive personality is an attitude that tends

to be opportunistic, initiative, daring to act, and persevering until it achieves significant changes. It

was continued that personality is explaining the factors that determine how a person's individual

treatment of an institution such as theological schools so that the goals and objectives contained in

this vision and mission are achieved properly.

Based on the analysis and discussion of the influence of transformational leadership,

personality, performance on organizational commitment at theological schools in West Java, it can

be concluded as follows:

1. The higher the personality of the lecturer, the higher the results of commitment to the organization, and

vice versa, the lower the personality of the lecturer, the lower the results of commitment to the

organization.

2. The greater the work performance, the stronger the results of the Commitment to the Organization, and

vice versa, the lower the performance, the lower the results of the Commitment to the Organization.

3. Personality has a positive direct effect on performance, meaning that empirically a stable personality will

be able to improve performance.

Thus, if the organizational commitment of lecturers, personality, and performance is

improved properly, it can give an optimal influence and contribution to the progress of theological

schools in West Java.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In behalf of this my purpose resulting, we give an appreciated and thanks so much for Bogor

Theology Seminary in Faculty of Theology upon this opportunity who support or processing this

education journal accomplished well.

END NOTES

Burns, James M. Leadership, (New York: Harper and Raw, 2007), p.71-73



Ibid

Lesli W. Rue dan Lioyd L. Byars, Human Resource Management (New York, N.Y, : McGraw-Hill Higher Education,

2011) p.14

Bernard M, Bass, Leadership and performance, (New York: free Press, 2005), p. 86-87

Ibid p.14

Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A. Judge, Organizational Behavior, Global Edition, 15th Edition (USA: Pearson

Education Ltd., 2013), hal. 416-418.

Darwis S. Gani, Djoehana Setyamidjaja dan Sumardi, Kepemimpinan dan Organisasi Pendidikan (Bogor: PPS

UNPAK, 2008). P. 10-11

Jerald Greenberg. Robert A. Baron, Behavior in Organizations, Nine Edition ( New Jersey: Person Education, Inc,

2008), pp. 518-519.

Kreitner & Kinicki, Organizational Behavior, New York: McGraw Hill Companies, Inc., 2008, hal. 66-68.

Aan Komariah dan Cepi Triatna, Visionary Leadership (Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara, 2010), p. 78

Gary Yukl, Kepemimpinan dalam Organisasi, terjemahan Budi Suprianto (Jakarta: PT. Indeks, 2009), p. 304-305

Ibid p.14

Soekarso, Agus Sosro, Iskandar Putong dan Cecep Hidayat, Teori Kepemimpinan (Jakarta: Mitra Wacana Media,

2010), p. 188

Lesli W. Rue dan Lioyd L. Byars, Human Resource Management (New York, N.Y: McGraw-Hill Higher Education,

2011) p.14

Zaluchu, Sonny. Eli 2020. “Strategi Penelitian Kualitatif Dan Kuantitatif Di Dalam Penelitian Agama.” Evangelikal:

Jurnal Teologi Injili Dan Pembinaan Warga Jemaat 4(1), 28–38.

REFERENCES

Jason, A.C., Jeffery, A.L., & Michael J.W. (2009). Organizational performance and commitment in the workplace.

(New York: McGraw-Hill), 8.

Colquit, L., & Wesson. (2009). Organizational behavior. (New York: McGraw-Hill.Irwin,), 67.

Fred, L. (2011). Organizational behavior an evidence-based approach. (New York: Published By McGraw-Hill/Invin,

2011), 147.

James, L.G., John M.I., James H.D.Jr., & Robert, K. (2009). Organization behavior structure processes, (Fourteenth

Edition). (McGraw-Hill Irwin, 2009), 129.

Michael, A. (2006). A handbook of human resource management practice, (10th edition). (London NI 9.1N: Kogan

Page Limited), 271.

Wood, W., Zetianc, S.H., & Osborn. (2001). Organizational behavior. GlobalPerspective (Singapore: John Wiley &

Sons Australia Ltd), 113.

McShane, & Von, G. (2010). Organizational Behavior, Emerging knowledge and practice for the real world. (New

York: McGraw-Hill Irwin), 112.

Curtis, S., & Dennis, W. (2001). Retaining employees - The fast track to commitment, management research news,

24(65).

Luthans, & Fred. (2011). Organizational behavior. New York, McGraw Hill, 71.

Stephen, P.R. (2009). Organizational behavior, (translated by Diana Angelica, et al). (Jakarta: Salemba Empat

Publishers), 45.

Robert, L.M., & John, H.J., (2006). Human resource management (Eleventh Edition). (Jakarta: Salemba Empat), 91.

Fred, L. (2008). Organizational behavior (New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.,) (Eleventh Edition)), 147.

Greenberd, J., & Robert, A.B. (2008). Behavior in organization understanding and managing the milian side of work

(ninth edition). (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2008), 174.

Kreitner, & Kinicki. (2008). Organizational behavior (Eight Edition). New York: Mcgraw-Hill/Irwin, 166.

Paul, E. (n.d). Spector, industrial and organizational psychology: Research and practice. (USA: John Wiley & Sons,

Inc), 349-350.

Schermerhorn, Jr. (1997). Management. United States: McGraw-Hill Companies Inc, 13.

Jason, A.C., Jeffery A.L., & Michael, J.W. (n.d). Op.cit.

John, A.W., & John, R.H. (2020). Organizational behavior: Securing competitive. Advantage (South-Western,

Thomson Learning USA, 2005), p.143.

Greenberg dan Baron, op. cit., 183.

Leslie, W.R., & Lioyd L.B. (2007). Supervision key link to productivity. (New York, McGraw-Hill,), 278

Colquitt.,Lepine, Wesson, op.cit.p. 37



Edy Sutrisno, Budaya Organisasi (Jakarta, Kencana,2010), p.170

Jhon R. Schermerhorn, James G. Hunt, Richard N. Osborn, & Marry Uhl-Bien. Organizational Behavior(USA, John

Wiley & Sons,2010), p.76

Edy Sutrisno. (2010). Organizational Culture (Jakarta, Kencana), 179-180.

Anwar, P. (2011). Mangkunegara, Manajemen SDM Company (Bandung, Rosda Karya), 67, Edy Sutrisno, op. cit, 172.

Ujam, J. (2012). Personality Psychology (Bandung: CV Pustaka Setia, 2012), 72.

Feist & Feist, 2006., Mahdi, 2005., Robin, 2005., John, S. (2009). Educational Psychology, (Jakarta: Salemba

Publisher, 2009). 177.

Robbins dan Judge, (2013). Organizational Behavior, Global Edition, 15 (Pearson Education Limited), 167.

Wilson, B. (n.d.). Human Resource Management (Jakarta: Erlangga), 185.

Greenberg, J., Robert, A.B. (2008). Behavior in Organizations (New Jersey: Pearson Education International,), 142-

143.

Suzanne, C., De-Janasz., Karen, O.D., Dan-Beth, Z.S. (2008). Interpersonal skills in organizations (New York:

McGraw-Hill International Edition), 182.

Curtis, W.C., Phillip, L.H. (2008). Management and Organizational Behavior (New York: McGraw-Hill International

Edition, 2008), 182-183.

Yusuf, S. (2011). Child Development Psychology, (Bandung: PT. Teen Rosdakarya, 127-188.

Tain-fung Wu., Mei-Hui Tsai., Yeh Hsun Fey & Robert, T.Y.Wu. (2006). “A study of the relationship between

manager’s leadership style and organizational commitment in Taiwan’s International tourist hotels”, Asian

Journal of Management and Humanity Sciences, 1(3), 434-452.

Marselius, S.T., & Rita, A. (2004). The relationship between perceptions of transformational and transactional

leadership styles with employee job satisfaction, (Palembang, Bina Darma, 35-42.

Akbar, S.A.A. Freyedon, A.S.M.Z. (n.d.). Effect of the leadership styles on the organizational commitment given the

staff personality traits (The case study: Iran’s State Retirement Organization). Interdisciplinary Journal of

Contemporary Research in Business, Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research, 4(1). Public

management Department, Payame Noor University, Tehran, I.R. of IRAN.

Samuel, O.S. (2008). Demographic and psychological factors predicting organizational commitment among industrial

Workers. Department of Guidance and Counseling. University of Ibadan, Ibadan Nigeria. 2008.

Lee Huey Yung, (2008). The association between Organizational Culture, Leadership Behavior, Organizational

Commitment, Job Satisfaction and Employee Performance, Thesis (Malaysia Faculty Of Business and

Accountancy.

TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP IN THE ......Transformational leadership according to Lesli & Lioyd is a...

Documents

Transcript of TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP IN THE ......Transformational leadership according to Lesli & Lioyd is a...